CLEARED: Queens Rep. Gregory Meeks, who failed to list on disclosure forms a $40,000 “loan,” won’t be reprimanded. Above, how we’ve reported on his dealings.

WASHINGTON — This is a “Meek” form of justice.

Embattled Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-Queens) skirted any type of punishment — reprimand, censure, fine or expulsion — yesterday after the House Ethics Committee closed its investigation into the $40,000 that he received from a crooked pal and failed to report.

Meeks’ big break came when buddy Edul Ahmad — a real-estate broker and mortgage lender who pleaded guilty in October in a $50 million scheme that used straw buyers to defraud banks — refused to testify before the panel.

In 2007, Meeks received the money from Ahmad, but failed to disclose it on annual financial-disclosure forms for the years 2007, 2008 and 2009 as required by federal law.

Meeks called it a loan and paid back the money after the FBI started snooping around.

Meeks told the committee he lost the paperwork for the loan and paid 12.5 percent interest.

Ahmad’s attorney, however, told the panel there was no loan document signed by Meeks and no fixed interest rate.

Committee leaders called Ahmad’s credibility “highly compromised” and said it would be “unreasonable” to doubt Meeks.

Ahmad is facing 10 years in prison in the mortgage fraud.

“Even if the committee was able to interview Mr. Ahmad and Mr. Ahmad contradicted Representative Meeks’ version of the events regarding the Ahmad loan, the committee would be left with a ‘swearing contest’ between a member and a person who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud,” the committee report said.

“Given this situation . . . the committee has decided to close its investigation regarding the allegation that Representative Meeks received an improper gift from Mr. Ahmad,” the report concluded.

Meeks told the committee in a letter that the money he accepted from Ahmad was an “unsecured balloon loan to be paid with interest within 10 years” and that “a formal loan agreement” had been drafted but misplaced.

Meeks’ failure to report the exchange was not “knowing or willful,” the House panel concluded.

“The committee recognizes that unknowing failures to report such items are not uncommon. The committee determined that the evidence did not establish that the Ahmad loan was an impermissible gift.”

Meeks yesterday welcomed the news from the House, which has been looking at the matter for two years.

“I am pleased with the Ethics Committee’s decision, and I am glad that this matter is now closed,” he said in a statement.

“With this matter behind me, and much work yet to be done, I am looking forward to serving my constituents with continued commitment and vigor on the many critical issues that face our district and our nation.”

Meeks — who remains under investigation by the FBI and Brooklyn federal prosecutors — declined to comment further.